#1 in ai music models · the only one that licensed its training data before launching instead of after being sued.
91/100
verdictthe cleanest legal position in the category by a wide margin, and you retain rights to what you make — the catch is what 'commercial use' excludes.
Eleven Music vs Suno
Suno
Eleven Music
price
$8/mo
$6/mo
free tier
yes
yes
price
$8/mo
$6/mo for commercial
who owns output
assigned, with no copyright warranty
you retain rights
free tier commercial
not permitted
not permitted
litigation
umg + sony live; warner settled
none against the product
stems
pro and premier
unconfirmed
switch foranyone putting generated music into something they sell, who would rather not follow a court case.
pros
+trained on licensed data with merlin and kobalt deals signed pre-launch
+no copyright litigation against the product
+you retain rights, not stated to lapse on cancellation
+vocals via a curated library or your own reference
cons
−free tier is non-commercial only
−self-serve licence excludes film, tv and studio games
−elevenlabs takes a perpetual licence to your output for training
−music consumes 900 credits per minute from a shared pool
#3 in ai music models · two of the three majors have settled and signed deals — the lowest legal risk of the two big generators.
82/100
verdictthe settlements are the product here — universal and warner are now partners rather than plaintiffs — and udio's own pages are the hardest to read in the category.
Udio vs Suno
Suno
Udio
price
$8/mo
unverified
free tier
yes
yes
price
$8/mo
not readable
who owns output
assigned, with no copyright warranty
user, per help centre
free tier commercial
not permitted
permitted, with credit
litigation
umg + sony live; warner settled
umg + warner settled; sony live
stems
pro and premier
unconfirmed
switch forpeople who want suno-class output with meaningfully less unresolved litigation attached.
pros
+universal and warner settled and signed licensing deals
+commercial use permitted on the free tier with attribution
+help centre states users own the output
+reported royalty and audit terms give the settlements substance
cons
−pricing and terms pages unreadable without javascript
−sony litigation still live, ruling slipped to 2027
#5 in ai music models · an open-weight model with a licence you can audit, attached to a hosted product whose terms you can't read.
74/100
verdictthe only vendor here publishing a real open-weight licence for music — and the only one where the hosted product's own terms were completely unreadable.
Stable Audio vs Suno
Suno
Stable Audio
price
$8/mo
free under $1m revenue
free tier
yes
yes
price
$8/mo
free under $1m revenue
who owns output
assigned, with no copyright warranty
user, per community licence
free tier commercial
not permitted
permitted under threshold
litigation
umg + sony live; warner settled
individual suit, jan 2026
stems
pro and premier
unconfirmed
switch fordevelopers under the revenue threshold who want weights they can inspect and self-host.
pros
+genuine open-weight licence you can read and self-audit
+free commercial use below $1m annual revenue
+no major-label litigation identified
+self-hostable rather than dependent on a service
cons
−$1m revenue cliff forces an enterprise negotiation
−hosted product's pricing and terms entirely unreadable
−'powered by stability ai' attribution required
−a training-data lawsuit from an individual musician is live
#7 in ai music models · changed name and owner twice in a year, and its own terms page returns 403.
64/100
verdictgoogle's infrastructure and synthid watermarking behind a product that has been rebranded twice and whose rights documentation we could not open.
Google Flow Music (formerly Riffusion) vs Suno
Suno
Google Flow Music (formerly Riffusion)
price
$8/mo
free with a google account
free tier
yes
yes
price
$8/mo
not readable
who owns output
assigned, with no copyright warranty
user, per general google terms
free tier commercial
not permitted
unverified
litigation
umg + sony live; warner settled
none against this product
stems
pro and premier
unconfirmed
switch forpeople already inside google's ai subscriptions who want watermarked output with provenance.
pros
+synthid watermarking for provenance, unique here
+google's general terms state you retain output ownership
+free to start with a google account
+built on deepmind's lyria 3
cons
−product terms page returns 403 — rights unverifiable
−renamed and re-owned twice in twelve months
−no readable price list
−commercial use and monetisation terms unconfirmed
#8 in ai music models · keeps the copyright in the track you generated, and forbids you from releasing it as a song.
58/100
verdicthonest and clearly written about being a sync-licensing service rather than a music generator you own the output of — which is also why it ranks last.
Beatoven.ai vs Suno
Suno
Beatoven.ai
price
$8/mo
unverified
free tier
yes
no
price
$8/mo
not readable
who owns output
assigned, with no copyright warranty
beatoven, always
free tier commercial
not permitted
sync-only, all tiers
litigation
umg + sony live; warner settled
none identified
stems
pro and premier
referenced, tier unconfirmed
switch forbackground music inside your own video, podcast or game, where a sync licence is all you need.
pros
+clear, well-drafted sync-licensing terms
+perpetual licence per download, surviving cancellation
+no royalties owed on qualifying use
+no litigation identified
cons
−beatoven retains the copyright in your generated track
−distributing the track to spotify or apple music is prohibited
every tool on this page went through the same test as Suno — same tasks, same order, scored the same way. the comparison tables are the figures from that testing, not vendor spec sheets.